Welcome to MyPolitics-Forum.com, brought to you by the same folks who bring you MyMedia-Forum.com.Thanks for dropping by! Is the page too narrow for your preference? Once you register, you will be able to set it to your liking! You will need to register before you can post, so why not get it out of the way now? Enjoy! :)

I voted totally legal as well because I wasn't thinking about "restrictions" in terms of third-term terminations as much as "under age" pregnancy.

As for the other options -- who decides whether or not the mother's life is in "enough" danger or which occurrences of rape qualify and which do not? What about the dangers to a mother's life that are not fatal, as in when a pregnant woman is not fully prepared for parenthood -- such circumstances generally affect the child adversely as well and set off a cycle that continues for generations. To spin it out to an extreme, one legal abortion could prevent generations of abused/neglected children from ill-equipped, unprepared mothers.

I, personally, prefer a greater focus on other issues -- such as birth control and early sexual education; strong social and emotional support for individuals, particularly for children and teens; counseling with full access to information about adoption before any procedure -- over abortions. Far better, I think, to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies to begin with. But I do believe that abortion should be a legal option available to all women.

Here, I'm equating "with restrictions" to having to consult with a professional or a doctor.

And I'll just add that I find it ironic that much opposition to legalized abortion tends to come from conservatives, who are normally all about keeping government out of people's personal business and not having government controlling our lives....

And just to be a materialistic poo-head, there's another factor that rarely gets talked about and that is the impact on society that a supposed increase in abandoned or orphaned children might bring. Now I know that there's a waiting list for adopting healthy babies, but that tends to evaporate when the baby has severe health issues or if the child is older. Just saying....

And just to be a materialistic poo-head, there's another factor that rarely gets talked about and that is the impact on society that a supposed increase in abandoned or orphaned children might bring. Now I know that there's a waiting list for adopting healthy babies, but that tends to evaporate when the baby has severe health issues or if the child is older. Just saying....

The number of kids living in the system, whether it's group homes or foster care, is huge. Most of these were unwanted children, imo. Many parents of those kids would say no to that, that there were just problems in the family. But if you want your child, you give them a safe loving home where there is no threat of removal.
Kentucky is so full of kids in the system that they are regularly overlooked because state workers have far, far too many cases.

So we can say shithead but not f***head? Just want to be clear on that.

I don't believe that anyone has a right to tell a person to sacrifice herself for someone else (either her life or health-- as someone who was just pregnant, it doesn't have to be life-threatening to screw up your health).

But it's kind of not cool to say that the kid's life is worth less because he or she wasn't planned. As much as it sucks to be in the foster care system, I bet a very small percentage of those kids would say they would rather not be alive.

__________________Kurt Vonnegut: Should the nation's wealth be redistributed? It has been and continues to be redistributed to a few people in a manner strikingly unhelpful.